Talk:Dawa Dem/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Jon698 (talk · contribs) 15:53, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   No prose problems within the article. However, the lead is severally lacking and needs an expansion.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

   No copyvios found in this article. However, in the infoxbox the dates are unsourced with my biggest problem being the dates for the Private Secretary, Royal Secretariat and Secretary, National Women's Association of Bhutan.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   This article covers the entirety of her life and career.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   I cannot find any neutrality problems with this article.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   No edit wars.

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   The one image in this article is perfectible fine.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

@Jon698: Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI has expanded the lead and the dates are now verified in the article body. You can see the pages referenced from C. T. Dorji's book through this preview on a commercial website. Are there any other issues left? Regards, TryKid ^{[dubious – discuss]} 00:51, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

• @TryKid: No I have no other issues with the article. I am done with the review. Thank you for Wihelm Tell for making this article. Jon698 (talk) 00:58, 17 October 2020 (UTC)